On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 3:45 PM, Roger Horner <roger1818 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Don't forget the higher communication speed also means higher power
> consumption, even when idle. While a couple watts may not seem like much,
> if you keep the equipment on 24/7, that works out to a couple bucks of
> electricity per year per computer (plus extra for the switch). If you are
> frequently doing file transfers, it might be worth the expense, but it isn't
> necessary if all you are doing is streaming video (100baseT is more than
> enough for multiple simultaneous streams). Just one more thing to keep in
> mind.
>>This is not entirely true. There is absolutely no direct correlation
between bandwidth and power consumption. While it is true that a Gigbit
switch produced at the same time as an equivalent 100Mbps switch may consume
1-2W more power per port, our "green" society has encouraged vendors to
implement power saving technologies that can make replacing an old 100Mbps
switch with a Gigabit switch a power saving upgrade.
Even if you were upgrading to a more power hungry switch, simply having a GB
network can save you power simply because the DURATION of the transfer is
reduced allowing the machine to resume a low power state (assuming it left
it to perform the transfer) much sooner. Of course this depends upon your
workload/environment; this is especially true with the new Green switches.
Check out:
http://www.dlinkgreen.com/energyefficiency.asp
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.mythtv.org/pipermail/mythtv-users/attachments/20111007/52865316/attachment.html